There are individual cases of knights going on what we’d call “quests”. One English knight asked a woman what it would take to win her hand and she tasked him with taking a castle in Scotland. The request was written and found on his person when he died trying to fulfill said request. It’s probable she just wanted him to leave her alone and set an impossible task but you know. He was an idiot
@@mateuszslawinski1990 I mean if their job is taking toll from travellers for "keeping the roads safe", they would ocassionally have to do a quest or two getting rid of bandits, or there will be nobody left to toll.
@@marcusc9931 That's less of a knight going on a noble quest and more of a knight acting like a bandit with the power of the state behind them eliminating a rival bandit gang that doesn't.
The closest modern equivalent would be a well-educated, military-trained gang banger. They would definitely have had the same culture of "if we think you've disrespected us, we'll kill you in the street."
I prefer to hold tight to my misconceptions. The world was a little more interesting when I was told that Pepsi was a branch of the armed forces. Edit to fix auto correct
In 10th-12th century, wandering warriors offering their sword to small landlords for local feud, tornaments, watchguards, became a lifestyle. At the same time, the most efficient of these warriors could enter the knights military elite, whatever their origin. Tradition expected from landlords that they would invite any noble traveler for a day or two. The traveler would provide news and tales from the countries and domains they visited. After a few years of tornament and small battles, a knight could hope to make a good marriage to a settled heiress, or to enter service of a powerful landlord. When not achieving this, the knight could turn into a monk, take duty for a city, or turn a robber. Crusade and military orders later gave additional opportunities A good late example is William the Marshall, described by Duby : first a junior supported by his kinship, then a poor knight making is name by traveling from tornaments to tornaments, he married a rich heiress, lived as a landlord and finally as a religious to prepare his afterlife. In 13th-14th century, poetry started to celebrate wandering knights, selfessly fighting for honor and love, awarded by generous landlords and beautiful ladies - just when this lifestyle was disappearing : power of kings, dukes and counts was strong enough to stop local feud, errand warriors became better organized in bands of mercenaries, knighthood was not awarded for feats of arms, but by inheritance.
In a way, wouldn't the sons of knights who weren't in line to inherit anything but joined up with mercenary bands/crusades essentially be "questing?" What is a quest if not a glorified bout of wandering and murder-hoboing? If those sons didn't have anything to worry about, family-wise, wouldn't that pretty much embody the questing knight?
Ah yes, the standard stretching of the truth to fit one's own perceptions/desires. A favorite pastime of yours, I assume? The truth is, though, you merely *_WANT_* there to have been questing, and you are just twisting reality to fit your desire.
Of course it can. I think you’re spot on-don’t mind the humorless wretch who slammed you. Any enterprise with a journey can be made into a quest (although I haven’t heard that any such word was used in the Middle Ages). Righting a wrong, recovering artifacts or relics from the “unworthy”, scourging heathens and heretics (ideally ones wrongfully possessing artifacts)-all can qualify as a “quest” if you ennoble your objective and/or demonize your opponents. If you are commissioned or at least approved by someone noble and powerful, so much the better. If you are prone to thuggery then the further away and more perilous the quest, the better (I always liked “find Prester John”). The romanticized version of a Quest by a Knight Errant is for bards and filmmakers.
There's at least an instance of a Knight named Alvaro Goncalves Coutinho from the XV century who alongside 12 other knights were given the quest of fighting 12 english knights in an official tournament who had allegedly offended publicly 12 english damsels. Alvaro Goncalves Coutinho went from Portugal to England by foot and arrived at England at last minute before the tournament, to help his outnumbered comrades. While this is likely a legend, it is known that all of the knights have existed and have been part of numerous travels around Europe as errand knights, and the tournament did exist too.
I would like to expand it further and claim it's a mockery on idealists of all kinds. Because oddly enough, idealists often like the book while missing the whole point.
or you could see it as even though it is absurd, it was is a good in and of itself. is the intent not as important as the reality? I like don Quixote because it isn’t quite cut and dry.
Having read it, it's kinda that but also kinda satirizes the cynical and materialistic of the world. Some old nobleman goes mad, picks up some antique armor, mounts a nearly-dead-from-old-age horse, and goes off "questing" with his best friend (and chief enabler), doing good despite having only a barely tenuous connection to reality.
@@derekchristenson5711 In a way I agree. But this was a good deal after the ideal of the chivalric knight was past and gone, and I dont think Cervantes was simply kicking a dead horse. I think thats too simplistic of a veiw. Especially when that something had been dieng out for the last 60 years from when it was published. I think its a more complex illustration rather than just a cynical recounting. Don Quixote IS trying to do good, and even when that is so removed from reality, there is even good in a madman. Likewise, even though many of the normal characters are down to earth, many of them do simple acts of idealism along with more frank and selfish ones. And sancho displays his own form of serendipity in his worldly, but still loyal way. I took it as a more nuanced take thar both satirized, but also extolled the knightly virtues, as well as satirizes and extolled the virtues of a more practicalist life. Being able to both criticize and legitimatize something at the same time.
Hey this is exactly like how cowboys were portrayed in literature as heroes when in reality they were just men or women who moved and protected cattle.
Historically, Knights, pirates, samurai, and cowboys, were all different things. In literature, they're kind of the same thing just in different times and places
The (adult) manga Shigurui did a great job at portraying this for the Samurai caste. Despite the cultural differences, there are many parallels through the power dynamics under feudalism. "Like mafia clans" really does come to mind quickly with Shigurui's narrative of samurai households.
Early knights, maybe, but as the Middle Ages went on and the Code of Chivalry actually became a thing, more knights started living up to the ideal- each country has a handful of beloved folk hero knights, like William Marshal in England, Siegneur de Baynard in France, Zawisza the Black in Poland, etc. They were professional soldiers, and could be as noble and valiant as many war heroes or just hired thugs.
Thanks for the video! It would be also interesting to note about the knight literature back then. When reading de Cervantes, it seems in 16th century there were tons of literature about knights going on quests to save a damsel, get some artifact or a new kingdom for that matter.
This is why I object to people insisting on realistic gender roles in games. If we're going to have questing knights, to say nothing of wizards, why are female warriors too unrealistic?
@@ivanvoronov3871 ok, but isn't that the one people discribed as, _Like Skyrim, only you die of plague three hours in?_ Very very few games make a real effort to be historically accurate.
@@jesseberg3271 exactly. That's why it depends on context. I.e. nothing wrong with having a black MC but not in a feudal japan game.( unless you are specifically talking about Yasuke who was thr only Africa samurai. Same with women, if its a fantasy go ahead( as long as it doesn't ruin lore. If its a realistic game no. Or make it harder like mount and blade where you can play as a woman but its much harder because people don't take you as seriously
Another interesting part is the traditional knight's tales of questing, which where romanticized during the later medieval periods, but like Arthur, Beowulf and Charlemange's knights were all from the early medieval period, which was more ruled in a chiefdoms (ea. direct give-take relationship between kings and their retainers) than the full feudal system.
As I understand it from history class knights seeking service with a local lord could be tasked with a "quest" (sort of) to show their value. But most of these where menial things as was described in the movie, like showing they could fight (tournament), prove their valour in the field of battle (if there was a war on), hunt down some local robberknights (kill these and you're in) or at least pay for their own damn horse (a very common shortcoming, the idea of two crusaders sharing a horse wasn't fiction). This was essentially a practical thing to show the knight was worth keeping around because it was better to just pay them or the problems that was described would happen and the local lords knew this. A quest was just something they could call any form of errand because it had to look "nice" and "noble" (because knights). Also saying "This knight brought order to the land as I ordered him to do." sounded better then saying "I'm simply keeping him around because otherwise he and his drinking buddies would pillage my lands."
@@ArkadiBolschek There would be much rejoice across the Realm of the Britons. From the Castle Camelot and Knights of the Round Table (Who Dance Whenever They're Able) to the nuns of Castle Anthrax and Swamp Castle IV, much rejoice would be felt by the people.
The reason why stories about the exceptional quests of great knight's are told is specifically because the men and their quests they went on were exceptional. Exceptional people create exceptional stories, and theirs are the ones we hear. Nobody will tell the story about Henry the Average, because he didn't do anything worth retelling. This leads to a bias where the only stories we hear are those of extraordinary people, and the average hero of a story will always be exceptional in some way.
@@InfernosReaper exaggeration is happened bc the speaker told the story. Exaggeration could be added to the story from the start by the people that experience the story firsthand.
I think the idea of the "questing knight" is just the narrative "hero" trope applied to the medieval period. Mythology and literature are full of stories about brave men travelling to achieve some noble goal or other, with the purpose these stories being entertainment, chronicling the past, and inspiring positive behaviour in young men. It's basically the same story trope as one finds in Star Wars or The Hobbit. It's everywhere, even if medieval folklore.
There may have been times where a knight was tasked with negotiating or storming/infiltrating a castle for a dansel (likely a ransomed relative of a nobleman and can be male or female) but that is one in a blue moon as for those were done by people more suited for the job and its unlikely that they would try to storm or attempt a rescue unless they can't pay.
@wargent99 Fiction has often more influential than reality anyway, not just myths. Just look at most politics between 1800 and 1900, idealized things and lies are often the source of many behaviours and decisons. Hell, the first Fascist group, the Italian Fascismo, was built on the idealized concept of being heir to Rome, rather than entire history of the peninsula in the 1500 between the end of the Western Empire and 1900
Norman knights kind of went questing in groups, only they usually had their own objectives unknown to the lords that invited them. Their formal quest was usually to help some lord somewhere far away to win a local war. Their real quest was to get invited by some far away lord who lacked soldiers so that they would be guaranteed to be one of the largest armed forces in the region and then install themselves as rulers. Worked really well in Southern Italy and during the first crusade.
While this is true, the term quest as we know it often derives from when a son who wishes to become a full fledged knight would try to find bandits to prove his worth. Furthermore, knights often participate in jousts and large battles amongst themselves for glory and spoils of war. Often people died during these battles which resulted in local feuds which in turn caused instability. It is worth noting that these battles were outlawed by the church because of the barbaric killings (At least in the church's eyes). However, most knights just ignored it as the church had no way of enforcing the action except by saying that they would go to Hell. On a side note, some people believe in King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table. This is where you can find the most references of kings sending knights on quests for Holy objects. However, no notable person during the time period (Out side of the story obviously) was named Arthur. There also has been disagreements of where Camelot was located. So most scholars and historians say that the work of literature is false. Sorry for this long comment.
The relevant name would have been something along the lines of "Arturias" (that butchering is mine), because the name is of Latin derivation, and thus would have been structured like that. The Venerable Bede (at least I _think_ he was the source on the first Anglo-Saxon invasion) mentions a high-ranking warrior (probably from a Roman occupation era noble family) of the right name, and a century or three later the name "Arthur" became really popular around the time of the _Second_ Anglo-Saxon invasion, so we can be decently sure that he existed in some form. Similarly, a british king likely did die around the French town of Avalon while traveling to answer a summons for military aid by the Roman emperor of the time (the relative remoteness of his place of death being part of the reason it's treated as some mystical place- almost noone in Britain at the time would have been familiar with it). It's possible that a round table may even have been associated with them, as well as a related order of knights. Some of the other names may well be right as well (e.g. Guinevere is a name from the correct culture). Even "Excalibur" is likely relevant in the same way as "Arthur", as it's likely a corruption of the Latin "ex Caliburnum" or the like, for "out of Caliburn" (as in, "made in Caliburn"). That's probably the limit of it. The Arthur that fought the first Anglo-Saxon invasion probably was not the "rightful king", but instead just a nominal head of a coalition of similar aristocrats- it's worth noting that several are traditionally considered to be his _relatives._ Similarly, it's very possible that whoever died near Avalon was a different person. As for Lancelot, never had anything to do with Arthur assuming that Lancelot even existed (probably best to consider him a character added to win over Norman warriors), and Merlin is a corruption of someone that lived at least a century later and in Wales instead of the area where the Anglo-Saxons were fought against.
Clearly this man has never played an rpg if he think collecting tolls or fighting local petty crime isn't a quest. Killing rats in a basement is a quest. Gathering flowers is a quest. Talking to two people on the opposites sides of a town is a quest.
The questing literature that sprung up in this period was in fact a response /to/ these non-inheriting troublemakers, trying to convince them to go around doing nice things rather than making trouble.
Only thing left out is that one of the reasons some crusades, (particularly the first one,) took place was to get knights out of France (in particular) because they could be such a public nuisance.
The origin of stories. Boring hunting trip? Attacked by a dozen sabretooth tigers. Boring trek across the mountains? Dragons. Lots of 'em. Boring ocean voyage? Sea monsters. Didn't do your homework? Homework-eating werewolf. You get the idea, I'm sure.
But since many knights were tasked with upholding law and order in their region. Surely it happened at least some times that they did things like saving hostages and raiding bandit hideouts? Even though most probably just sent lower men to do that job I'd imagine quite a lot of them personally lead these "quests" for the sake of honor and prestige.
@@absalomdraconis Retaliating against your neighbor is extremely important considering they are actively trying to undermine/conquer you. Lot of people like to go "why weren't people peaceful back in the day, are they stupid?" when in reality peace was never an option.
On the Scottish border there was constant raiding and various families who were prominent in it, being fairly notorious for loose loyalty and barbarism. That area had its own distinct culture for centuries, one that ended up having a deep cultural influence on the American South of all places. France saw mass scale raiding by the English and England was occasionally raided by the French navy. In England and most other lands that weren't borderlands there were laws to enforce and criminals who fled into the woods were made outlaw (literally the law didn't apply to them) and male peasants had the duty of joining local posses (yeah, that's where it comes from) to hunt them down, local notables would almost certainly be leading any said hunt. The Holy Roman Empire and Italy were often in a mess and there was all sorts of trouble one could get up to. Spain, Prussia and the Holy Land were in a constant state of religious war and one could gain a name or more importantly to most knights forgiveness of ones sins for fighting there. The Holy Land also had a permanent knight shortage, and were desperate to keep hold of any who came to fight, you could move quickly up the social hierarchy with but a little skill and there were an overabundance of rich widows and daughters looking for a husband and the were a lot less picky than in Europe (though compared to today there was already more willingness to marry down), the one caveat was that there was good reason for these opportunities existing, you were probably going to die fighting Muslims. There was a reasons it's destiny was closely tied to how many Normans there were kicking around. Poland was another interesting place, but it was kind of a backwater. Hungary had a powerful entrenched nobility who you'd likely not want to get involved with. The Balkans were the same as ever and it was best to avoid the place unless you were part of an army traveling though or you really had to be there for some reason. The Byzantine Empire held rich office and pay but the were heretics who refused to acknowledge the supremacy of Rome and they were rightly suspicious of Latins as despite their effectiveness when facing Muslims they tend to have little motivation against anyone else, also they occasionally went rough, captured a castle held by the Muslims, declared their own kingdom and started getting up to King Arthur level shit. Russia was both heretic, and past the pagans so unless you were a Scandinavian merchant with a longboat there wasn't much reason to go that far. Scandinavia had lost a good deal of prominence so unless you were Scottish you probably weren't going to have to bother with them. Ireland was as it ever was, if you wanted to fight savages in a bog during an endless series of petty wars against petty clans that went no where then great, just remember that your descendants will likely integrate into the clans there marry into and the next generation will have to put them to the sword as well. Going out of bounds of Christendom was an interesting form of suicide to pick, best case you'd be enslaved and sold to a fat Arab to be molested for the rest of your days. Iceland was a pretty nice place if you thought that Europe had too much going on and not enough pickled fish.
Especially in war as Plundering is just a normal part of war in that time, in fact almost every Kingdom has a "policy" that should a city not surrender than the attacker has a right to plunder it. On other cases where Mercs are involved when they are denied payment than they would sack a city, this was actually the reason why the 4th Crusaders actually sacked Constantinople because the Byzantine Pretender didn't give them their pay.
So knights acted pretty much like me in damned near every open world RPG I ever played and robbed looted pillaged and chased butterflies whenever possible. Good to know.
I’m a man of simple things. I see a history matters video and it is immediately watched, o matter when or where I am. Always 3 minutes of comedy gold with historical learning. What more could you want
@History Matters I'VE MADE SUBTITLES FOR 30 OF YOUR VIDEOS. Please can you add them because YT have a new policy that *only you* can add subtitles? The viewers can't add subtitles anymore - it's impossible - YT removed the feature due to spammers & not many people were writing subtitles
I'd assume there was at least some questing. Probably during the Dark Ages when different lords wanted to take over their neighboring lords' territory. Either that or rescuing someone who was ransomed. Or finding the witch. Or collecting taxes (treasure) from the local hostile population. Or depopulating a village (pest control quest). Or being a message courier (travel to new lands). Or escort a group of travelers through dangerous territory (Knights Hospitalier).
Mercenaries did actually go on pretty neat adventures. I would research Robert Guiscard, the Norman mercenary whose greatest quest was storming Rome to break the Pope out of captivity by assaulting an army 5x bigger than his own. He then set controlled fires around Rome to form a smokescreen to aid his retreat and he got the Pope out of Rome unharmed.
I would say yes: -Wars (and especially crusades). -Duels between knights before battle (or during siege). -Jousting challenges (protecting bridges). -Risky embassies. -Exiled knights trying their luck.
History Matters: *Says my name at the end of the video* Me: *Screams like a little girl* Finally!!! Edit: Jesus it hits differently when your thanked for your support. Thank you so much you spiffing chap for your dedication to teaching the masses 😁😁😁
I like to imagine at least a few times a Knight had a "quest" the equivalent to "Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court", where he's taken on a quest to rescue a damsel, and it turns out that it's just a farmer and some pigs. So, he buys the pigs and calls it a successful quest.
You say that, yet in earlier times they would go off questing, they'd go to a foreign nation that was at war (during a time their own lands were at peace) and sign up as mercs. So as to remain in peak fighting condition. This practice was fairly common.
I still love the videos but happened to putting sources in the description? The last few videos haven’t had them and as a history grad student I loved seeing them
Yes, and they had the same problem with robber knights (called ronin in Japan) they had in feudal Europe. Basically, weak central government + lots of autonomous local warlords = trouble.
“Questing” to retrieve holy artifacts MUST have happened. How else do you transport relics from the Holy Land to Europe? Sure it was probably not some epic adventure, more like being a delivery boy. But being assigned to escort relics on would be seen as quite romantic compared to, collecting toll.
While Pilgrimage is common for Knights "Questing" just didn't happen though its likely that they did some things like negotiating a Ransom or freeing a kidnapped Lord but those are very rare as there are other people for those jobs.
@@Maus_Indahaus True, when I checked the video for verification I saw the map at 1:28 but the map at 0:04 is displayed more, which features the Ottos. However, the map is still 15th century, the late middle ages.
@@g.zoltan Yes, but the Commonwealth is from the 16th. Unless they consider a personal union of (at a time) separate countries of Poland and Lithuania. Also Venice only had such borders much later than medieval times
